Page | 1
INEQUALITY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE
1. Socioeconomic Inequality
1.1 Wealth Inequality
Based on this understanding, the causal power of wealth inequalities on crime rates or criminal
justice outcomes is very high as it may later manifest in the form of high crime rates within the
poor or financially less-able territories. Piketty, 2014, posits that the increase in concentration of
wealth amongst a few has actually accelerated the socio-economic inequalities, thus motivating
social tensions and, thereby, criminal activity within the poor communities. Through this, it
creates an avenue for reduced access to important services such as education, health facilities,
and housing, some of the prerequisites for eliciting crime prevention, in this respect, Sampson
records that high poverty levels and economic inequality yield higher cases of violent crime in
society due to the fact that individuals struggle to achieve basic needs coupled with low
economic opportunity. It is also elaborated that failure to enjoy a stable financial life is mostly
the reason that forces them to involve in crime for survival reasons. In addition, Hagan, 1997,
defines that criminal justice mainly harasses and punishes the poor; hence poverty and crime go
hand in hand. This systemic bias results in harsher sentencing and higher incarceration rates for
the poor at the cost of entrenching the economic disparities, adds Hagan in 1997. Finally,
Wilkinson and Pickett provide evidence for that the societies which have more income
inequalities within them have higher rates of crime and violence, in effect, economic inequalities
erode the cohesion in society and break down trust amongst people, leading to increased crime
rates since a lot of people feel on the periphery of mainstream society. The immediate inference
that can be drawn is that equity in wealth distribution has to be achieved if low crime rates and
an ethically balanced criminal justice system are to be gained. Obviously, policies that have
Page | 2
redistributive effects, access to basic services, and economic opportunities for disadvantaged
communities can easily reduce the effect of disparities in wealth on crime and justice.
1.2 Education Gaps
Education gaps contribute to a great deal of inequality in crime and criminal justice by offering
reduced opportunities for social promotion and economic mobility, lower educational
achievement usually results in higher propensities to commit crimes resulting from reduced
employment opportunities. It is this very logic that Lochner and Moretti use to argue that higher
educational levels would abate crime, suggesting education enriches not only cognitive skills but
also social skills and improves future employment opportunities. They therefore argued that
giving individual sufficient skills to be able to thrive in the job market would give him
opportunities that keep them away from crimes. Their research concludes that education serves
as a tool of increasing an individual's opportunity of positive life outcomes while decreasing the
possibility of criminal behavior, Hjalmarsson, p1, remarks that in most cases, young offenders
indicated to have lower levels of educational aspirations and achievements than their non-
delinquent peers. Education gives one a sense of purpose, hence raising self-esteem and
distancing such an individual from participating in crime. It enables them to develop a sense of
achievement and future orientation and, hence, positive identities and goals, his findings suggest
that improving young people's educational attainment greatly improves their long-term outcomes
and reduces delinquency, Hjalmarsson, 2008.Freeman comments, "Poor labor market outcomes
for less educated individuals are associated with higher crime rates.". Improved access to
education and higher quality in education lower crime by the creation of opportunities for legal
employment and raising earning potential. Freeman argues that education acts as a protective
factor against criminal activity through its impacts, which improve economic outcomes and,
Page | 3
therefore, reduce attraction to criminal activity, his research serves to drive home the point that
policies aimed at giving equal opportunities to all in accessing quality education should be
viewed as a means of crime prevention, Freeman, 1996. Heckman and Masterov, 2007, however,
have gone a step further to argue that early childhood education is very integral in preventing
future criminal activities. Their argument is based on the supposition that " investments in early
education pay high returns in lower crime rates and other social and economic advantages ".
Early Childhood education programs produce positive and durable skills and behaviors which
endure over a lifetime, Heckman and Masterov underline that early childhood interventions are
cost-effective ways of reducing crime and the cost connected with crime and, therefore, they
constitute an astute investment by society as cited in Heckman & Masterov, 2007.
1.3 Employment Inequities
While employment inequities are salient in determining crime and criminal justice outcomes,
unemployment and underemployment drive individuals to criminal activity. As per Wilson,
1987, the structural change which happened within the economy with decline of manufacturing
jobs affected a lot of low-skilled workers particularly in urban areas. This has led to high
unemployment, few job opportunities, and therefore an increase in the level of crimes as they get
involved in other lucrative businesses to make ends meet. According to Holzer et al. 2006,, the
chances of getting employment by those who had committed crimes were minimal and hence
would keep on living in crimes. Creates other barriers such as employer discrimination, lack of
job training, and legal restrictions that negatively affect the reintegration into labor markets and
increase the propensity to commit more crimes, Pager, 2003 refers to this in the context of effect
of racial discrimination in hiring practices creating employment inequities. She finds out those
African American applicants with a criminal record fair worse in the job market compared to
Page | 4
their white counterpart, thereby fueling also the racial disparities within the criminal justice
system. Pager, 2003, revealed that the African American applicants with a criminal record face
worse job markets than their white counterparts and in effect accentuate racial disparities in the
justice system. To the last one, Western has pointed out that it is stable employment that plays a
very paramount role in reducing risks of recidivism and ensuring successful reentry into society.
He thinks that policies ensuring real access to and quality of jobs for ex-offenders can do the
most in reducing crime best and really enhance public safety. In his view, by reducing inequities
in employment opportunities, this is a way through which crime rates can actually be lowered
and really make the criminal justice system more equitable, policies to increase the availability
of employment, reduce barriers specifically identifiable as affecting hiring applicants with a
criminal history record, and eliminate racial discrimination in hiring could all potentially play a
role in reducing the contribution of employment inequities to crime and justice outcomes.
2. Racial Inequality
2.1 Racial Profiling
Racial profiling has been such a pervasive practice of law enforcement authorities and is
variously defined as "any practice by law enforcement that relies on race, ethnicity, religion, or
national origin rather than behavior or information that links individuals or groups to a particular
criminal incident." This practice further gives boost to racial inequality and is, in turn, very
undermining to public trust in the police. As cited, what law enforcement agencies usually do to
justify racial profiling is use of this tactic as a crime-preventing measure; however, it
disproportionately affects minority communities—especially African Americans and Hispanics.
According to Harris, the type of profiling not only violates civil liberties but it is also inefficient
in crime control since it puts the bases on race rather than forward-looking behavior or credible
evidence, 1999. In addition, it has been proved that racial profiling undermined community trust
Page | 5
in the police, which further complicates the latter's work since it becomes hard to enlist
community support for programs aimed at preventing crime, they found that those who feel to be
victims of racial profiling rarely report crimes or try to cooperate with the police during
investigations, which actually decreases safety for all, Gelman, Fagan, and Kiss add a statistical
dimension to the argument by pointing out that there is greater predisposition on the part of the
police to stop and search minorities when, in fact, they "were less likely to be found with
contraband compared with whites.". This really goes on to prove that racial profiling is not only
discriminatory but even ineffective in reducing crimes. The effects of racial profiling do not stop
at the direct contact that law enforcement officers make. According to Alexander, racial profiling
simply fuels bigger, systemic problems of inequity within the criminal justice system, higher
rates of arrest, tougher penalties, and long-term confinement for minorities, this thus sets up a
cycle of disadvantage and marginalization that further entrenches racial disparities, racial
profiling is, in the final analysis, something ineffective and unfair, it overemphasizes racial
inequality and lessens the effectiveness of the criminal justice system, racial profiling must be
eradicated by encouraging practices of evidence-based policing that places a premium on
behavior and credible intelligence—not race—with broader reforms tackling systemic racial
biases in both law enforcement and criminal justice.
2.2 Sentencing Disparities
Race-based sentencing disparities present a major challenge to fairness and equity in the
provision of criminal justice, actually, almost every available research conducted for this subject
has been able to establish that minority offenders, in particular African Americans and
Hispanics, are treated more harshly than whites until the same kind of crime is committed. Based
on the contention of Mitchell, 2005, racial prejudice flows freely throughout the justice
Page | 6
process—from the time of decisions of initial charging to the final sentence outcome. For
instance, in one meta-analysis, Mitchell reported that compared with white defendants, African
American defendants were more likely to be sentenced to incarceration and received a longer
sentence when controlling for crime severity and criminal history. Moreover, judicial discretion,
as Spohn insists, is also another factor that makes sentencing unjust for African Americans. In
most of the cases, the discretion to determine penalties is left to the judges on their own, and
their decision is always in favor of implicit bias, which often works against minority defendants.
According to Spohn, what is needed is structural reform—such as setting up guideline sentencing
and openness about the decisions reached—to cut these disparities. Indeed, a 2018 study by the
Sentencing Project also repetitive of the mandate addressed to minimum sentencing laws as key
drivers of racial disparities, in most instances, these laws strike out judicial discretion, flowering
into harsh penalties for drug offenses that are disproportionately mandatory on the minority
communities. This paper shall argue for the repealing of the mandatory minimum sentencing
laws and new sentencing practices that are more oriented towards rehabilitation as opposed to
punishment, finally, Pager explains how sentencing disparities impact minority communities in
the long run, a such, a criminal record drastically minimizes job opportunities, housing options,
and access to social services, in the same vein, then, it begets a cycle of disadvantage in the
perpetuation of racial inequality. Pager makes it clear that what is called for here is
comprehensive reform—a package of reforms that get at how racial disparities operate in the
short and long term. Some of the multiple solutions for reducing racial disparities in sentencing
include policy reform, increasing transparency, and reducing implicit bias in the justice system,
fair and equal sentencing will do a better job servicing the principles of justice and equality that a
criminal justice system is set to uphold.
Page | 7
2.3 Police Brutality
Police brutality probably forms a single most important issue pointing out deep racial imbalances
in the criminal justice system, it has been analyzed that when it comes to police violence and
excessive force, the brunt of the attack mostly is borne by minority communities, more
specifically African Americans. Edwards, Lee, and Esposito assert that the chances of African
Americans being killed by police are much higher than white Americans. It found that the
lifetime likelihood for an African American man being killed by the police to be 1 in 1,000, more
than twice that for white men, this disparity is so stark that it underlines how systemic police
violence really is and how deep of an impact it has on minority communities, Weitzer and Tuch
also insist that one major consequence of police brutality is the loss of public trust and
legitimacy, especially in minority communities. The outcome was reduced cooperation with the
police, viewing bias, and an increase in tension between the police and community members,
according to Weitzer and Tuch, police departments have to institute reforms targeted at better
accountability and transparency to improve community relations and rebuild trust, for example,
Amnesty International 2015, in one of its reports, shows how accountability for police officers
involved in brutality incidents is very minimal. Investigations that surround police misconduct
are mostly partial, and it is rarely found that officers are seriously punished for their actions.
According to Amnesty International in 2015, the lack of accountability in this regard creates a
culture of impunity for the law enforcement where officers believe that they are empowered to
engage in excessive force with impunity. In the last instance, Brunson and Miller, 2006 look at
the psychological and social effects of police brutality on minority communities. They argue that
recurrent exposure to police violence engenders chronic stress, trauma, and generalized feelings
of injustice among members of the community, this has not only meant mental illness for the
victims but has also mortally eroded the social capital of the community, further marginalizing it
Page | 8
and resulting in many who distrust the justice system, conclusion: Police brutality calls for
reforms in enhancing accountability, transparency, and reaching out to the community, certainly,
in the quest for justice for all communities and seeking to regain trust in the criminal justice
system, the root causes of excessive force ought to be addressed.
3. Gender Inequality
3.1 Gender Bias
The criminal justice system contains a very high level of gender bias, and this turns to result in
many inequalities in treating men and women, it has been documented that women were judged
more rigorously on crime since society stereotyped gender roles. For instance, Daly in 1989,
found that women who commit deviant crimes vis-à-vis the typical female role, crimes of
violence are punished harshly not just by the legal system itself, but also by societal perceptions.
This can lead to particularly harsh sentencing in the cases of women, moreover, according to
Chesney-Lind, 2006, stereotypical images about femininity and motherhood often influence the
way the criminal justice system treats offenders who are women. For instance, these women who
do not meet social expectations about their gender roles—the nurturing, the submissive—end up
receiving harsher penalties. Indeed, this is a gendered lens that interferes with the way women
should be regarded and judged, thus being treated unequally at the time of sentencing and in
regard to the chances for rehabilitation opportunities. More interestingly, however, Spohn and
Beichner also present evidence that such gender bias affects the treatment of male offenders, for
example, when it comes to violent crimes, males get more years of sentencing than females do,
and again, this is more or less of what society is expecting from male behavior and aggression.
This bias may further stretch to the years given in prison, fewer opportunities for reformation
given to the male offenders—once again, all part of the process to reinforce gender inequality
within justice (Spohn & Beichner, 2000). Another study conducted by Steffensmeier, Ulmer, and
Page | 9
Kramer in 1998 also revealed that judges' perceptions of gender roles play a huge role in their
judicial decision-making while sentencing criminals. They go on to add that such biases can only
be dealt with by providing adequate training to judges and other judicial officers so that justice
may be delivered without any bias on the ground of sex, thus, in a word, gender bias destroys the
objectives of fairness and equality in the criminal justice system. These biases can only be
overcome through appropriate policy reforms and education and training in the criminal justice
system in order to give men and women due and fair treatment under the law.
3.2 Victimization Rates
Victimization rates point to important gender differences in experiences of crime and violence,
with certain types of crime more heavily resting on women. According to Tjaden and Thoennes,
women are significantly more likely than men to be victims of intimate partner violence and
sexual assault, their analysis indicates that nearly one in four women has experienced severe
physical violence by an intimate partner, compared to one in seven men, this disparity underlines
the gendered nature of victimization and specifically points to certain interventions that are
required for female victims, the authors underline that tackling intimate partner violence requires
specific protection and support measures for women, since they are disproportionately exposed
to the problem.A 2013 report from the WHO summarized that violence against women,
particularly intimate partner violence and sexual violence, is a leading global health problem
with very severe consequences on women's physical and mental health. It has called for multi-
dimensional strategies for violence prevention, protection of victims, and provision of adequate
support services in the report, it has also been mentioned that legal reform initiatives, public
health-oriented interventions, and community-based approaches must be included if the root
causes of this violence against women are to be dealt with. The findings from WHO underline
Page | 10
the urgency to undertake global and local initiatives to address these ubiquitous problems and
provide help for affected women, justice is something that can seldom be achieved for women
who become victims of sexual assault, according to Kilpatrick et al., in that they often face
several barriers in their attempts to seek justice, because of both societal stigmatization and
victim-blaming attitudes, as well as lack of decent responses by the police and other law
enforcement and judicial agencies, more common ones are barriers that hinder women's pursuits
for justice and allow offenders to act with impunity. According to Kilpatrick et al., there needs to
be societal and systemic change to create an environment in which victims feel safe and
supported enough to come forward and report sexual violence. This includes training for law
enforcement, legal reform, and public education campaigns purporting to shift societal attitudes
and reduce stigma, overcoming these barriers is important to ensure that the female sexual
assault victims can freely access justice and support services, according to the National Institute
of Justice, male victims of sexual violence are usually left alone by the criminal justice, and this
poor treatment makes them suffer more stigma, making it rather unlikely for one to report such a
case, this support gap thus demands strategies that are all-inclusive and responsive to all victims
irrespective of gender. There are certain issues specific to male victims, such as societal
expectations of masculinity and fear of not being believed or taken serious, the criminal justice
system must be adapted so that there may be appropriate support and resources for male victims
so that all victims can get justice and supportive services, it includes training for law
enforcement and judicial personnel and publicity programs for eliminating stigma and
encouraging reporting. Indeed, bridging gender gaps in victimization entails multi-dimensional
solutions that involve reforming policies, educating the public, and providing improved support
Page | 11
services for all victims of crime. Both women and men need adequate protection and support if
there has to be real justice in the criminal justice system.
3.3 Legal Protections
Legal protections for women in the criminal justice system are very basic in fighting gender
inequality and ensuring fair treatment of people, however, in most cases, such legal protections
are very basic or at times applied inconsistently; therefore, this situation makes women treated
differently from their male counterparts. According to Fineman, " traditional legal frameworks
have proved to be less than satisfactory in their protection of women's experiences and needs,
particularly in cases relating to gender-based violence and discrimination." This poor protection
enhances inequalities and injustices against women in the context of the legal framework.
Indeed, as Coker explains, "a study of legal responses to domestic violence points out their
limitations.". As noted by Coker, many places enacted protective laws from domestic violence. It
is further reported that such laws are very poorly implemented, hence most women do not get
protection and help. Normally, restraining orders are hard to enforce while shelters and support
services are hampered by inadequate funds and resources. In addition, Goodmark has criticized
criminalization for failing to address the causes of the violence and often having unintended
negative consequences on women, for instance, mandatory arrest policies against domestic
violence perpetrators at times result in dual arrests whereby the victim and offender are arrested,
thus further traumatizing her and complicating her situation. According to Schneider, 2000, there
is the need to put a gender perspective into legal reforms so that women's special problems are
effectively dealt with. This would involve the initiation of policies sensitive to gender, as well as
training law enforcers and judicial officials to understand and appreciate the emerging issues
relating to gender-based violence and discrimination, on the other hand, improvement of the
Page | 12
legal protective mechanisms for women is also the precondition of ensuring fair treatment and
reducing gender gaps in criminal justice. It means that there should be an overall approach to law
reform, better implementation of it, enforcement of existing legislation, awareness rising on
gender issues at all levels, and appropriate training of legal professionals, it helps fill in the
lacunae that the legal system can be of better aid and support to women and generally work
towards justice and equity.
4. Geographical Disparities
4.1 Urban vs. Rural Crime
Geographic disparities in crime rates between urban and rural areas bring out enormous
differences in social dynamics and challenges of law enforcement, for instance, urban centers
usually record high incidences of crimes, either violent in nature or property crimes, mainly
attributed to population density and socio-economic factors. With higher rates of economic
inequalities, unemployment, and social disorganization, urban environments actually increase the
opportunity for crimes to happen, according to Smith and Petrocelli, 2001. This concentration of
disadvantage raises the possibility for committing crimes because of additional social and
economic pressure from the community to the individual according to Smith and Petrocelli in
2001. In addition, the very physical layout of urban areas characterized by crowded
neighborhoods with few common public spaces predisposes one to additional crimes such as
robbery and assault. According to the "broken windows" theory, Wilson and Kelling hold the
view that urban environments riddled with disorder and neglect breed an atmosphere in which
lawlessness thrives, thus contributing to ever more frequent criminal behavior. Besides
anonymity in city life that enhances offending by easier management of crimes without
detection, thereby adding to the higher rate of crime rates. This is as argued by Brantingham and
Brantingham, 1995. The problems of crime prevention and law enforcement in rural areas differ
Page | 13
in nature. While the aggregate crime rates might be low in the rural setting, other categories of
crimes like drug-related offenses and property crimes may be high in this setting as a result of
isolation, poverty, and limited access to resources. According to Krivo and Peterson, most rural
communities have little or no adequate law enforcement resources, and even in cases of crimes,
coordination of response is very difficult due to geographical distances and a small population.
This will eventually lead to a slower response rate, and it will also be difficult in crimes
successfully being brought into court and convicted ofKrivo & Peterson, 1996. Moreover, the
tight social interactions in rural areas can affect the likelihood of reporting since more often than
not, citizens would be unwilling to report local squabbles or crimes to authorities due to fear of
social repercussions from their friends or neighbors. Rural Crime and Justice Center, n.d.
4.2 Resource Allocation
Resource allocation in law enforcement goes deep to prevent crime and safety within the
community; it simply reflects priorities in society and fiscal considerations. Discussion by
Maguire and Okada is that differential funding arrangements or allocation might dramatically
affect the effectiveness of crime prevention as well as the quality of services delivered with
respect to policing. If the funding is not sufficient, then the law enforcement agencies lose the
ability to deal with crime effectively due to a lack of vital resources such as personnel,
equipment, and training, Secondly, resource allocation creates inequality between the urban and
rural poor since most allocations are done in urban areas due to the high population and crime
rates compared to the rural areas. This makes it difficult for rural communities to maintain
sufficient levels of law enforcement service and adjust to the changing patterns of crime,
Weisburd and Eck, 2004 Resource allocation also affects feelings of safety in the community and
their relationships/ confidence in the police. Skogan, 2006, states that fair resource allocation
Page | 14
enhances the legitimacy of the police and encourages community effort in the prevention of
crime. To the contrary, inequities in resource distribution could be corrosive of trust and
collaboration especially in areas that have underserved or marginalised communities, Skogan,
2006. That notwithstanding, resource constraints may also affect innovations in policing
practices that are implemented to undertake community outreach and relationship-building
activities between agencies and residents, National Institute of Justice, 2016, this places a
premium on resource allocation policies that equitably distribute resources and ensures fairness
in all law enforcement practices.
4.3 Law Enforcement Distribution
The patterns of the distribution of law enforcement agencies and officers relate significantly to
the trends for crime and safety across the different geographical spaces, in the case of an urban
center, there will be a greater requirement for a denser concentration of law enforcement for the
solution of the manifold problems brought about by the existence of larger populations with
higher rates of crimes. Walker and Katz give an emphasis that strategic deployment of police
resources within the urban environments focuses on high crime areas, visibility, and proactive
policing that prevents criminal acts. This approach is taken in order to be able to respond to
emergencies faster and enhance public safety through building trust between the law
enforcement agencies and the urban communities, effective urban policing involves
concentration of resources in areas with higher incidents of crimes. In sharp contrast, rural areas
are thinly covered by law enforcers, geographical factors that make response times slower and
often affect crime deterrence. For instance, Wilson and Grammich, 2003 assert that sheriff's
offices, state police patrols, and sometimes federal agencies supplement local law enforcement
services in rural areas. Vast distances and small populations, coupled with limited financial
Page | 15
resources, stretch the capacities of law enforcement and result in inequities in service delivery. A
big problem in rural areas lies in recruiting and retaining qualified personnel into law
enforcement as competitiveness in salaries, promotion opportunities, and specialized trainings
often cannot be provided. This disparity contributes to a slower response time and lower
effectiveness of response to crime, which may further enhance feelings of vulnerability among
rural residents, strategies to address the disparities in law enforcement distribution must account
for geographical variables, demographic variables, and socio-economic variables, one of the
more salient strategies would be interagency coordination. Good coordination among local, state,
and federal law enforcement agencies should be able to optimize resource allocation and
response capabilities, for example, joint task forces and information-sharing efforts can enhance
jurisdictional capacity in the effective management of crime, and last but not least, utilizing
technology efficiently is one of the most crucial responses. Improving communications
technologies, like better radio systems and real-time data sharing, can increase response time and
operational effectiveness—particularly over dispersed geographic areas.
5. Economic Impact of Crime
5.1 Cost of Crime
The cost of crime extends far beyond mere monetary losses; it extends to broader social and
economic costs to communities and societies in general, Smith and Cohen, in 2010, document
that among the direct costs of crime are expenses related to policing, adjudication, and victim
services. All these costs strain public budgets and divert resources from other socially valuable
programs, hence creating opportunity costs that generally impact societal wellbeing, notably, the
financial burden of crime mitigation efforts makes the issue of effective strategies in crime
prevention and resource allocation very significant (Smith & Cohen, 2010).Other than the direct
cost, there are significant indirect costs which mean crime has an economic burden. Leigh points
Page | 16
out that some of these indirect costs include lost productivity, reduced property values, lower
tourism, reduced business investments, and many others, these all serve to deter economic
growth and development within high-crime areas of a country, eventually leading to long-term
stagnation in the economy, the presence of crime acts to create an environment that deters
potential investors or residents, thus 'locking' them into a cycle of economic decline (Leigh,
2010). Further, Cohen and Piquero note the more intangible costs of crime, many of which are
less quantifiable but equally important. The effects relate further to the poor quality of life of
people residing in areas where crime has taken the better of citizens, as well as the sense of fear
of victimization. In this manner, this issue accelerates social disintegration in neighborhoods,
furthermore, the undermining of social cohesion and trust within communities compounds the
economic costs of crime through hindering collective efforts towards development and
prosperity, the cycle of crime limits residents' economic opportunities, thus perpetuating poverty
and inequality. According to Hoffman and Duncan, 2017, such criminal activities serve to
engender inadequate employment opportunity, poor educational, and minimal social mobility
that traps the individual and community at large into cycles of poverty. For this reason, the
perpetuation of inequality by Hoffman and Duncan, 2017, ruptures initiatives geared at acquiring
inclusive economic growth and enhancing social equity. The multifaceted nature of the cost of
crime therefore demands multi-dimensional approaches that weave together strategies for
effective law enforcement and community development interventions, this would be possible
through the funding of crime prevention mechanisms like community policing, youth activities
and economic revitalization, all of which hugely depress crime and enhance social well-being,
second, strengthening victim support mechanisms and enhancing access to justice reduce the
larger social costs of crime within society, (Leigh, 2010).
Page | 17
5.2 Funding of Crime Prevention
Crime prevention programs are critical to reducing the economic burdens of crime and ensuring
improved public safety, Welsh and Farrington emphasize that preventive programs enjoy far
more dazzling cost-benefit ratios compared with the reactive approaches. They content that very
early intervention strategies focusing on at-risk children, coupled with social determinant
interventions, do yield substantial long-term savings by reducing future criminal justice
expenses, societal costs occasioned by crime. It is involved in cause-oriented efforts of crime
prevention as opposed to a simple reaction to crime activities. According to Welsh and
Farrington, all evidence points to the fact that proactive crime prevention efforts are associated
with reduced crimes as opposed to reactions after crimes have occurred. In a different study,
Braga et al, called for evidence-based policing strategies that facilitate analytical decision-
making within the police force while collaborating with the community in crime prevention
efforts, in such an approach, data analysis identifies the trend of crimes and crime hotspots so
that effective deployment of the police force can be done to prevent crime by involving the
community in crime prevention efforts, such collaborative efforts not only drive effectiveness in
the delivery of crime prevention approaches but also ensure that there is trust between the law
enforcers and the communities they serve, critical to sustainable improvements in public safety
(Braga et al., 2014). Levitt also supports a number of innovative policies, such as focused
deterrence and hot spot policing, in order to ensure resources are correctly aligned with those
areas most strongly affected by crime, focused deterrence combines targeting high-risk offenders
with enforcement and social services, while hot spot policing focuses policing efforts in small
geographic areas with high crime rates. These have been documented to result in maximum
crime reduction at the lowest possible levels of financial expenditure thus corresponding to cost-
effective means through which crime can be prevented. According to Levitt, 2004, it is for this
Page | 18
reason that there exists numerous prevention programs aimed at curtailing the rising cases of
crime. In an extension, Chalfin and McCrary, 2017 point out the essence of adopting highly
effective methodologies for evaluation to ensure that prevention programs are effective in terms
of both crime and economic outcomes. According to them, running agricultural-style randomized
field experiments can generate very strong evidence on the efficacy of the various strategies that
are aimed at preventing crime, this scientific approach to evaluation ensures that only programs
with evidence of their effectiveness get invested in so that there is value for money in such an
investment into crime prevention, Chalfin & McCrary, 2017.
5.3 Economic Opportunities
Crime inflicts a lot of economic cost because of its negative implications on job replacement and
the productivity of the labor force, this consequently compromises or diminishes business
expansion and economic growth. According to Raphael and Winter-Ebmer, 2001, this
discourages business investments and entrepreneurships in the respective neighborhoods, thus
promoting limited job creation and economic diversification. This therefore acts to foster poverty
cycles and social exclusion in the low-end areas. This again implies increased costs for
businesses and households in terms of higher premiums for insurance and security measures, all
straining on the economy's opportunities and growth, Freeman, on his part, indicates that there
are impacts of criminal activities on human capital development and educational attainments.
Quite often, crime breaks the continuity of education due to such factors, negatively impacting
individuals' schooling attainment and job training. These disruptions reduce opportunities for
upward mobility and the creation of human resources, therefore, areas characterized by high
criminal activities cannot easily break out of a cycle of poverty and consequently improve their
economic status, in relation to the same aspect, Moretti explains the spatial nature of crime and
Page | 19
its consequences for residential mobility and neighborhood dynamics. High crime rates
contribute to population decline and residential segregation, thereby reducing the exposure of
people to economic opportunities and social networks, this isolation leads to an increase in the
growth of economic inequalities, and a reduction in access to resources that could help in upward
social and economic mobility, this, in turn, creates a vicious circle whereby the declining
neighborhoods, due to the high levels of crime, offer limited opportunity for improvement. Some
of the economic costs of crime are related to direct losses, while most of them are indirect with
effects spilling over into the larger economy. For instance, lower revenues and profitability of
businesses can be attributed to reduced consumer confidence and consequent reduction in foot
traffic in high-crime areas. Moreover, the heightened expenditure on security measures and
increasing premiums on insurance are stressful to the financial coffers of both businesses and
households, these added expenses consequently reduce productive investments, further
dampening economic growth and development, moreover, Cohen and Piquero underscore the
cost of crime intangibles such as diminished quality of life, fear of victimization, and social
disintegration, these can, in turn, make it harder to build community cohesion and trust, which
then makes it hard to foster a sense of safety and collective efficacy, the psychological impact of
crime on individuals and communities contributes to lower civic engagement, which contributes
to difficulties in building resilient and prosperous communities, therefore, any strategies aimed at
mitigating the economic impact of crime must bring together the prevention of crime with
initiatives aimed at enhancing economic development, promotion of education, and reducing
socioeconomic inequality. Effective crime prevention programs are likely to save both future
criminal justice and societal dollars, Welsh and Farrington (2012) relate that intervention
programs at early age children and social determinants have huge long-term savings, such
Page | 20
programs not only avert crime but promote a better educated and more economically productive
citizenry, Braga et al support evidence-based policing models reliant on data-driven decisions
and collaboration with the community, this way, by targeting those places with a high crime rate
and involving the residents, the police get to know where to allocate resources and build trust
among the residents. Really, in such a way, one can deal with the problem of crime more
effectively, since such collaborative crime prevention strategies bring about a safer and more
stable community, Braga et al. support new policies like focused deterrence and hot spot policing
in 2014. These have been proven to provide maximum results in crime reduction but at a
minimum cost of financial outlay, thus these were the most cost-effective ways of preventing
crime according to Levitt in 2004.
6. Criminal Justice Policies
6.1 Sentencing Reform
Sentencing reform is one of the most critical areas of criminal justice policies that would reduce
sentencing disparity, Travis in 2004 advocates for guideline-based sentencing with emphasis on
rehabilitation and proportionality rather than mandatory minimums and stringent sentencing
measures, more severe punishments fall more heavily on minorities and the poor, thereby
establishing further cycles of incarceration and growing the gap between social classes (Travis,
2004). Such policies, when applied rigidly, have resulted in overcrowding in prisons and a high
incarceration rate within the criminal justice system, mostly from minority communities,Tonry
explains in his book how sentencing disparities bring about inequalities in the length and severity
of sentences imposed on racial and ethnic minorities compared to whites. He calls for reform
processes informed by mitigating factors such as socioeconomic background and the ability of
the offender for rehabilitation, by taking these factors into consideration, sentencing will take
into account the very basis of crimes, leading to much fairer outcomes of justice. According to
Page | 21
Tonry, 2011, in that way, the criminal justice system will be able to handle the very cause of the
crime and thus produce more just outcomes, along with the failure of the traditional sentencing
philosophies, Klingele, 2013 raises critical voices on the alternative sentencing systems, such as
drug courts and restorative justice programs, that do seem to play their positive role in reducing
recidivism rates and resocialization. These rehabilitative measures provide valid alternatives to
imprisonment since they allow offenders room to correct their behavior and find solutions to the
triggers of their criminal activities, Klingele, 2013 sings their praise for their capacity to be used
as an alternative to imprisonment; therefore, they reduce prison populations and equally achieve
better outcomes in the nature of rehabilitation. Spohn and Holleran, 2000 address the concerns of
judicial discretion on sentencing and how this creates different results in sentencing. They do,
however, support the idea that encouraging transparency and accountability in sentencing
practices will reduce biases and ensure that everyone gets equal treatment under the criminal
justice system encouraging judges to exercise their discretion thoughtfully and equitably may
balance the system toward punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation effectively (Spohn &
Holleran, 2000), Evidence-based practice is important in effecting sentencing reform to attain
these objectives, research has indicated that rehabilitative treatments, such as cognitive-
behavioral therapy and community-based programs, do reduce recidivism significantly and offer
an extra layer of public safety, this is because these interventions are aimed at the cognitive and
behavioral patterns of criminal behavior, which can consequently present a more permanent
solution compared to punitive measures, sentencing reform must include policies that focus on
these broader social determinants of crime, poverty, lack of education, and limited access to
mental health services, it is only by attacking these underlying problems that lawmakers can set
up a much more comprehensive way of dealing with the prevention of crime and rehabilitation,
Page | 22
for instance, more education and professional training for offenders could enable employment
opportunities and lessen recidivism, a sentencing reform should not only provide rehabilitation
services to offenders but also ensure fairness and proportionality in criminal justice..
6.2 Rehabilitation Programs
Rehabilitation programs play a significant role in criminal justice policy, they aim at providing
offenders with facilities and guidance that can help them in their social reintegration and reduce
recidivism, according to Petersilia, 2003, they focus on the foundational issues that contribute to
criminal behavior, such as substance abuse and unemployment, by education, vocational
training, and counseling. Petersilia (2003) claims that this type of programs does not only make
transition of offender easy from prison to community but also provides a long term measure to
prevent crimes by assisting offenders to abstain from reoffending. According to Taxman and
Belenko, the theories of rehabilitation programs must be based on evidence-based practices, the
author calls for the use of cognitive-behavioral intervention and therapeutic models that can help
in behavioral change and reduce recidivism, these are designed to address offenders' special
needs and risks, making the interventions effective and efficient. Latessa reviews some prison
interventions aimed at reducing re-incarceration and improving outcomes after release, he
describes that programs with elements of case management, job placement, and community
supervision are instrumental in successfully re-integrating prisoners into society. These are all-
inclusive programs that allow offenders to acquire skills and support systems that will help them
to avoid recidivism and, therefore, reduce recidivism, Clear, 2007, goes further on the societal
advantages that come with investing in rehabilitation as opposed to punishment. He argues that
rehabilitated offenders are useful members of their families and the general community, hence
minimizing social and economic costs associated with crime, clear argues that the long-term
Page | 23
advantages of rehabilitation, from reducing crime rates to innate populations and all the attendant
savings of dollars and community safety, outweigh the short-term gains of punitive approaches.
Community involvement is another important element of any effective rehabilitation program,
engaging community organizations, local businesses, and social services in this process of
rehabilitation can offer offenders a network of support beyond the confines of the criminal
justice system, the latter can further provide employment opportunities, housing assistance, and
various forms of social support that are essential to successful reintegration, in addition,
politicians at every level of government hold the keys to real success in rehabilitation programs,
this would increase the effectiveness of the rehabilitation effort, provided that policymakers
allocate resources to evidence-based interventions and support services. A comprehensive
strategy in terms of rehabilitation would require investment in education, vocational training,
mental health services, and community-based support systems to address the various needs of
offenders.
6.3 Community Policing
Community policing is the concept where trust between the police and the communities they
serve is fostered to achieve improved public safety by collaborative efforts in looking into the
root causes of crimes through proactive means, this strategy focuses on building a relationship
between the police department and citizens at the local level by jointly identifying problems in
neighborhoods with effective solutions to deter crime, while the conventional approaches to law
enforcement are reactive, the very philosophy of community policing is toward proactive
problem-solving, creating an atmosphere where citizens willingly come out and work in
association with the police for the elimination of crime from their communities (Trojanowicz &
Bucqueroux, 1990). According to Trojanowicz and Bucqueroux, the concept behind community
Page | 24
policing is to develop trust and cooperation between the police and the community. The
relationship encourages citizens to report crimes, participate in the neighborhood watch, and
engage in a conversation with the officers regarding public safetym, the collaboration thus helps
not only in preventing crime but also in addressing the social problems at the root of the criminal
behavior, such as poverty, unemployment, and lack of education, Rosenbaum and Lurigio further
the description of community policing to study its effect on the crime rates and perception of
safety in the community. Their paper describes how community-oriented activities such as foot
patrols and community meetings build up resistance at the neighborhood level against crim, these
efforts lay the appropriate structures to guarantee crime response effectiveness and give people a
sense of security, the police, through being close to the people and involving itself in their
activities, might deter some crime and increase public trust in the abilities of the police to
effectively deal with crime.Skogan, 2006, discusses further what community policing does in
trying to build police legitimacy and accountability. He holds that police responsiveness and
involvement in community affairs help to increase public confidence and decrease tensions
between the police and the public, if the community views the police as legitimate and open to
accountability, the people will cooperate with police efforts in crime prevention, thereby
enhancing public safety, Kelling and Moore present the "broken windows" theory, very
influential in community policing strategies. Dealing with minor offenses in crime and disorderly
conduct, according to this theory, will help prevent serious crimes from taking place and also
make the neighborhood orderly, the "broken windows" approach goes hand in hand with
community policing in regard to the penchant for proactive intervention and solution-oriented
collaboration. It is within focusing on such minor problems that police help to nip the growth of
criminal behavior into bloom and engender community pride and responsibility, essentially,
Page | 25
community policing is a proactive strategy in crime prevention, it insists on community
engagement, problem-solving, and mutual accountability.
7. Social Determinants
7.1 Access to Education
Access to good-quality education is considered one of the most important social determinants,
disproportionately impactful for respective outcomes in one's life and eventually the well-being
of society, Chetty et al review education with respect to its intergenerational effect on economic
mobility, showing how inequity in access to education results in cycles of poverty and inequality.
Chetty et al support the notion that increasing opportunities to education among disadvantaged
groups of populations would help reduce socio-economic barriers that have put up and increase
chances of upward mobility. According to Reardon, 2011, it is undeniable that the achievement
gap between the rich and poor is growing bigger and places unequal educational outcomes on a
lack of access by poor students to equally qualified teachers, challenging courses, and other
extracurricular resources. For Reardon, policy interventions mean fair access to these very things
as a way to ensure quality education and social justice, Darling-Hammond, 2010, discusses how
fair funding in schools may be used as a factor for improving access and academic opportunities
for students who are often marginalized, she further argues that what is required to seal
achievement gaps in quality education for all is fair sharing of resources, adequate funding
levels, and well-targeted investments in high-need schools, he has focused on SES and
educational outcomes, the interaction between family background, school environment, and
academic performance, which later explains the educational outcome gap. In other words, as
long as Sirin is concerned, holistic approaches targeting the person and structural barriers in
education access and success are necessary, equal opportunity to access absolutely the same
educational opportunities is an engine of social mobility and lower inequality, as Sirin summed it
Page | 26
up in 2005. This would require the implementation of robust political will aimed at decreasing
inequity in educational opportunity through policy targeting and investment; that success is in
sight for every person regardless of socio-economic status.
7.2 Housing Stability
Stable housing is a social determinant of health, wellbeing, and economic security, in 2016
Desmond, while commenting on the link between stable housing and desirable employment,
education, and overall quality of life, raised an excellent point. Desmond uses eviction and
homelessness as examples of unstable housing that undermine social and economic stability
among the vulnerable populations and increase poverty, he reveals that with no stable place to
live, it is challenging for individuals and families to hold down a job, maintain the children in
school, and attain a decent standard of life, the constant threat of displacement and the stress of
unstable housing create, in effect, a self-perpetuating cycle of poverty that is hard to escape.
Desmond's work emphasizes how stable housing provides a platform for economic and social
stability, O'Flaherty and Wu go deeper into the implications of affordable housing policies on
homelessness and housing insecurity, they say that strategies like housing vouchers, supportive
housing programs, and tenant protections are important avenues regarding the prevention of
displacement and promotion of housing stability, housing vouchers help low-income families
pay rent in the private market, and supportive housing programs link affordable housing with
services that aid those with highly complex needs in maintaining their housing, tenant
protections, such as rent control and just-cause eviction laws, set a floor to prevent renters from
unfair displacement. According to O'Flaherty and Wu, such policies have been shown to
decrease homelessness and housing instability by providing more stable living conditions for
populations at high risk of becoming homeless. They also underline the fact that a
Page | 27
comprehensive policy on affordable housing must be developed if all the causes of housing
insecurity are to be addressed (O'Flaherty & Wu, 2006). Shinn et al. (2007) discuss health
consequences of unstable housing and point out that both homeless people and families are
exposed to increased risk of a number of physical and mental health problems. Their findings
strengthen the supposition that stable housing is a core element of health promotion for equity
and well-being, homelessness puts one at risk of various negative health consequences, which
include higher incidences of chronic disease, psychiatric disorders, and substance abuse, on the
same note, Shinn et al. support that stable housing offers a base where an individual can get
healthcare, keep regular medical appointments, and create a better living environment, thus
contributing to health, it is possible to significantly improve public health in general and reduce
health disparities in communities by ensuring that individuals and families have stable housing,
Turner and Kingsley 2006 examine how housing policies impact corrections in racial and ethnic
imbalances within the avenues of housing access and affordability, they point out that a number
of discriminatory practices—redlining and exclusionary zoning among them—have curtailed
housing opportunities for too many minority communities, leading to continuing inequalities in
housing stability. Redlining is the practice of refusing to sell or insure a home because of the
racial or ethnic composition of the housing area; its effects upon accessibility to housing and
community development are long-range, this only serves to further entrench racial and economic
segregation through exclusionary zoning laws that would prevent reasonable development of
affordable housing in some areas, according to Turner and Kingsley, removing those structural
barriers was indispensable for the production of fair opportunities in housing and making sure
that all communities have the capacity for housing stability, their findings bring out a clear call
Page | 28
for policies geared toward advancing fair housing practices to reduce discrimination in the
housing market.
7.3 Access to Health Care
Access to affordable high quality health care serves as a determinant of health outcome and
general well-being, according to Baicker et al. (2013), noted earlier, health insurance coverage
reduced disparities in access to care, and improved health outcomes for the low-income
population, Baicker et al have posited that increasing Medicaid eligibility has a guaranteed
access to healthcare and decreased financial barriers to healthcare, besides the other health
insurance reforms. Ayanian 2004 details how no health insurance has implications for increased
delayed care, unmet health needs, and poor health outcomes of care for the uninsured. Ayanian
supports policies of universal coverage of health insurance to provide proper access to preventive
services and treatments, where he deals with a variety of inequities in relation to barriers against
and access to provisions within the health care sectorm, furthermore, Kominski et al. (2017)
examine the socioeconomic factor contribution to health disparities and access to care. They
argue, therefore, that it is actually income, education, and employment status that affect one's
influence to gain access to services and navigate the health care system. In their research,
Smedley et al. explore how health care access and outcomes are affected by structural racism and
discrimination in racial and ethnic minorities, their findings underscore the importance of
ensuring that policies related to the social determinants of health, health equity, and reducing
barriers to care are appropriately promoted among underserved populations, this means that, for
health equity to be achieved, there is an absolute call to give health care with fairness and
equality of access to every individual ,policies that would increase coverage, affordability, and
Page | 29
address social determinants of health are precisely those that help policymakers do a better job of
ensuring access to care and health outcomes for all people and communities.
8. Criminal Justice Outcomes
8.1 Recidivism Rates
One stark indicator of the criminal justice system failures in terms of rehabilitation and
deterrence is the nation's recidivism rates—the likelihood of those convicted of crimes to commit
offenses again, according to Langan and Levin, among others, this suggests that a number of
factors, such as poor programs for rehabilitation and stigma against ex-offenders in society, may
be accountable for increased recidivism rates. They drive home the point that, unless adequate
programs oriented toward reintegration, such as job training and mental health support, are made
available to facilitate successful community reentry, it is hard to break the cycle of recidivism.
Langan and Levin argue that in the absence of any such support, it is very difficult to have
integration, and ex-offenders are likely to offend again, their research emphasizes the importance
of full-scale rehabilitation programs that would address the special needs of those transitioning
from prison life to society at large, again, Langan and Levin's study finds it has been a challenge
to develop policies that will prevent criminal behavior in released prisoners; however, further
research in this area might help change this trend (Langan & Levin, 2002).Visher and Travis
assess the impact of social and economic factors on recidivism and isolate a few major drivers of
repeat offenses: unemployment, lack of housing, and insufficient support from the family circle.
They suggest that if these social determinants are addressed, then there is a possibility of
bringing down the rate of recidivism effectively, Visher and Travis also subscribe to holistic
approaches ranging from offering employment opportunities to stable housing and family
support systems, their finding is that these factors significantly predict an individual's ability to
successfully readmit into society or, alternatively, to avoid reoffending. Such attention by the
Page | 30
criminal justice system to these root causes can make reentry into society easier for ex-offenders
and decrease recidivism rates, in their work, Petersilia reviews evidence-based practices for
reducing recidivism, focusing on parole supervision and cognitive behavioral therapy, she states
that inattention to focused interventions tailored to unique risks and needs is a sure means of
ensuring public safety and reducing reoffending rates. Much of Petersilia's review focuses on the
efficiency of CBT in rectifying the cognitive and behavioral patterns that put one on the road to
crime, in addition, she places a good emphasis on parole supervision, which is able to provide
structure to the transition and thus some degree of supervision over the individual who is being
returned to society, she concludes that a combination of number of evidence-based practices can
really improve outcomes of ex-offenders and reduce recidivism rates, on the other hand,
Petersilia describes some correctional interventions that resist crime and decrease the propensity
for recidivism.
8.2 Trends in Incarceration
Overall, the trends in incarceration rates for the United States reflect major changes in criminal
justice policies, sentencing practices, and demographic impacts on prison populations, as Carson
and Sabol note, the combination of sentencing law changes and increased drug offense
prosecutions has been driving the growth of the U.S, prison population over recent decades, they,
however, counter that the result of the increase has been extremely congested prisons, hence
severely hampering fairness and efficiency in the justice system. Actually, this problem was
worsened by the explosion of the war on drugs and mandatory minimum sentences, dramatically
bloating the population of inmates, according to Carson and Sabol, these policies are aimed at
low-income and minority communities that feed a cycle of incarceration from which it becomes
very hard to get out, thus escalating the issue. Notably, Mauer and Chesney-Lind note that
Page | 31
incarceration rates are grossly disproportionate to racial and ethnic population balances. They
provide evidence of remarkable disparities in terms of sentencing outcomes and imprisonment
rates among racial and ethnic minorities, with a focus on African American and Hispanic
populations, their findings show that these groups have longer sentences than their white
counterparts for similar offenses, Mauer and Chesney-Lind call for broad reforms in the criminal
justice system to reduce these racial disparities, as well as to encourage alternatives to
imprisonment, mostly for non-violent offenses, they argue that such reforms must be enacted to
create justice and fairness since the system is imbalanced and unjust as it is working at present in
terms of sentencing and incarceration rates. According to Mauer and Chesney-Lind, 2002,
balance and fairness are required in relation to sentencing and incarceration. Clear tries to make
an estimate of the social and economic cost of mass incarceration, the coverage is based on
families, communities, and public resources, he argues that massive imprisonment leads to
breaking families and, consequently, weak community bonds, apart from proving very expensive
to public resources. Clear ascertains that a shift of the spending to prevention, rehabilitation
programs, and community-based options will alleviate the negative effects of imprisonment. He
says doing so would not only reduce the prison population but also improve outcomes for those
who do end up incarcerated, Clear argues that movement into these alternatives will start
constructing healthier communities, and better public fund allocation ensuring justice and
effectiveness of the criminal justice system Clear, 2007.Western and Wildeman take an in-
depth consideration on how effects of imprisonment structure life courses especially concerning
labor market careers, educational careers as well as social status, their research shows that
incarceration reduces later-life opportunities of prisoners and makes re-entry and social
integration into society very hard, they maintain that collateral consequences of imprisonment
Page | 32
have an effect that goes beyond the individual—family and community, Western and Wildeman
provide arguments for policies that secure reentry successes, such as job training, education, and
social support for the inmates at the time when they are released, they argue that collateral
consequences reduction can aid immensely in making sure ex-convicts turn their backs on their
past and improve public safety through significant reduction of the rate of re-incarceration.
8.3 Programs for Reentry
Re-entry programs are the channels through which successful transitions from confinement to
community life are facilitated by encouraging rehabilitation and reducing recidivism. An
investigation by Mallik-Kane and Visher, 2008, illustrated that reentry programs must be
centered on employment, housing, health, and social support needs, their hypothesis was that if
effective reentry programs were given to such individuals, they would fare better in the period
right after release and stand a better chance of achieving long-term reintegration into society,
their research denotes that the satisfaction of these critical needs most strongly impacts a former
inmate's likelihood to successfully readjust and, therefore, reduces the tendency toward
recidivism. Programs dealing with reentry in the fields of employment, housing, and health tend
to decrease the magnitude of those difficulties that could lead to re-offending. It places a heavy
emphasis on broad-based support systems that will turn towards the multifaceted needs of
persons making transitions from incarceration back into community life,Travis, in 2005, adds to
the scholarship of barriers to successful reentry with a discussion regarding employment and
housing opportunities available to ex-offenders, he does, however, indicate that such barriers are
some of the major impediments to reintegration, as they affect an individual's capacity to secure
stable employment and housing, Travis advocates for policies aimed at removing these barriers,
insisting that the second chances people get when released from prison are important to reduce
Page | 33
recidivism and improve public safety, he finds that these policy reforms can have an important
impact on the process of reintegration; better results for individuals and their respective
communities are promoted. Travis argues that if these structural barriers are to be overcome, the
environment will turn supportive for those previously incarcerated individuals to be on a positive
path of integration. Their research has focused on how those services—transitional housing, job
training, and mentoring, to name some—are positioned to help ex-offenders undergo positive
reentry experiences and reduce recidivism rates, they say such programs are very instrumental in
providing ex-offenders with support needed to overcome common challenges associated with
reentry, in this way, stable housing, job training, and mentorship afforded by reentry programs
increase their chances for successful reintegration and reduce the propensity for recidivism,
Roman et al emphasize that well-designed, multi-service reentry programs ensure public safety
and better overall effectiveness of the criminal justice system.
